Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2012/05/22
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
A probable copyvio. Timestamp there is of an earlier date than that of upload. Lovy Singhal (talk) 05:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Copyright © 2009 Webdunia.com from website http://greetings.webdunia.com/english/parshuram_jayanti/parshuram-jayanti-574.html Intelligent 1000 (talk) 14:06, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Delete poster Motopark (talk) 15:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
deleted copyrighted poster --PierreSelim (talk) 06:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Edoderoo (talk) 14:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC) image not free Edoderoo (talk) 14:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 09:48, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
The current version seems to be a photoshopped version of this image. Stefan4 (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Pretty clear derivative work. Source image also here. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation RE rillke questions? 07:13, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
unused filename, file renamed to "Biscellaria sp - 2012-05-19.ogv " Pristurus (talk) 18:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 18:50, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Edoderoo (talk) 12:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC) http://eng.tekkenpedia.com/wiki/File:AzaT6.JPG ... not allowed to edit Edoderoo (talk) 12:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 15:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Edoderoo (talk) 13:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC) found image all over the web, so not likely to be own work. See also other nominated or deleted images from this user. Edoderoo (talk) 13:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 15:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Edoderoo (talk) 13:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC) enter-screen from a video game. Not own work, also not free. Edoderoo (talk) 13:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 15:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Fehlerhafter Dateiname, Bild wurde erneut hochgeladen. Pedelecs (talk) 09:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 07:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:10, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:27, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Low quality; not realistically useful for any educational purpose. Powers (talk) 17:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
не фотохостинг. нет энциклопедической ценности — Redboston 18:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Keep Photos of public areas are usually of interest. This is in use, so it is automatically in COM:SCOPE anyways. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:58, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use and in scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:34, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
не фотохостинг. нет энциклопедической ценности — Redboston 18:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Photos of public areas are usually of interest. This is in use, so it is automatically in COM:SCOPE anyways. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:57, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use and in scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
не фотохостинг. нет энциклопедической ценности — Redboston 18:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep It's a picture of a bridge, which is in scope. It could use a crop, no question, but it's still in scope. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:59, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
не фотохостинг. нет энциклопедической ценности — Redboston 18:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep This is in use, so it is automatically in COM:SCOPE. Not a great photo, but certainly could be of use for someone documenting street crossings (images associated on Google Maps or something). Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
unused, personal file, see COM:SCOPE Polarlys (talk) 20:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:37, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
unused, personal file, see COM:SCOPE Polarlys (talk) 20:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:38, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
and File:BARTOLO GARCIA MOLINA (SEMBLANZA DE UN ESCRITOR).pdf. Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private file storage. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Martin H. (talk) 17:49, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Files of User:Camilo015
[edit]- File:Yo....JPG
- File:Cuando ! no se como podia escalar por las paredes ¡.JPG
- File:Que rumba.JPG
- File:Aaa el dia de las velitas..... que bien la pase ese mes.jpg
- File:Yo quando estaban de moda las gatas.jpg
- File:Yo y mis compañeros de clases (10-3).jpg
- File:! Aaa yo soy muy lindo ¡.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Out of scope. Personal photos of no educational value. – JBarta (talk) 22:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Sok Rithy.jpg
- File:Tieng Tiny.jpg
- File:Teab Vathanak.jpg
- File:Chan Rithy.jpg
- File:Cambodia11.jpg
- File:Yaty.jpg
- File:Um Vichet.jpg
- File:Ppcfc.jpg
- File:Khoun Laboravy.jpg
- File:Keo Sokngon.jpg
- File:Kouck sokumpheak.jpg
- File:Khim Borey.jpr.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploads by this user are copyright violations, unfree files taken from other websites and uploaded with false claims of own work. Martin H. (talk) 11:02, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AshisHazra (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 07:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Files of User:Yenajbus
[edit]- File:Sissy janey 14.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 13.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 12.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 11.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 10.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 9.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 8.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 7.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 6.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 5.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 4.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 3.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 2.jpg
- File:Sissy janey 1.jpg
- File:Sissy janey cheerleader.jpg
- File:Sissy cheerleader.jpg
- File:Priceless Cheerleader.jpg
- File:Internetforever.jpg
Out of scope. Some contain personal contact information. --– JBarta (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: I nuked all uploads of Yenajbus because of out of scope and COM:IDENT Trijnsteltalk 20:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (wrong hands) should not be used - Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 20:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (wrong skull shape) should not be used -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Superseded by File:Dilophosaurus.png -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 20:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (should be bipedal and feathered...) -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 20:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate and superseded by File:Paralititan1DB.jpg -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 20:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (wrong skull shape) Should not be used -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 20:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Wrong skull shape. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 22:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (wrong hands) Should not be used -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 21:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (pronated hands) Should not be used -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 21:10, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (tail, neck, etc...) Should not be used -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate depiction (tail, skull, etc...) Superseded by File:Ornitholestes_NT.jpg -- Author request ArthurWeasley (talk) 21:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Denniss (talk) 09:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Uploaded by mistake. Jacques.delacroix (talk) 10:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Good-faith req by uploader on the day of upload. Unused image. Túrelio (talk) 12:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
The listed source page for this file states that the photo may be "freely downloaded and used" ("frit hente og anvende billeder"). I believe this is not explicit enough for it to be on Commons. In kind regards heb [T C E] 07:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think that it is unclear if derivative works are allowed. Note that "Spørgsmål omkring billederne kan rettes til Kommunikationssekretariatet til vagthavende presseofficer på telefon 70 200 440." Have you tried asking the "vagthavende presseofficer" about the matter? --Stefan4 (talk) 12:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Comment. This type of permission was brought up at village pump/copyright mentioning this file as an example. Some believe that the vague permission statement is not clear enough to be uploaded to commons. We also discussed changing the wording of commons policy to state that permission statements like this should specifically include derivitive and commercial use. I just thought I would mention this here as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Yes - that was also me :) --heb [T C E] 12:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted, Per Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2012/06#How_explicit_does_a_license_need_to_be.2C_when_uploading_files_from_another_source.3F and COM:PCP the given license is most likely not as explicit as required. In kind regards, heb [T C E] 09:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Doubtfully own work, better resolution here http://piggington.com/dkm3a?size=_original Funfood ␌ 05:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:18, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:11, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Despite uploader claims as own work, taken with Canon EOS-1D Mark II, as are other pro shots uploader claims were his "friend's photos" Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyvio. Ernst Stern died in 1954, so PD-old-70 is wrong. Same goes for all other files in Category:Ariadne Auf Naxos, Ernst Stern (except the title pages which are PD-ineligible) AndreasPraefcke (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 12:51, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Own work seems unlikely at best. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
There is no evidence that the uploader is the copyright holder. Even if he was, I suspect the image is based on this which has this as license, which does not allow use outside wallpapers. Muhandes (talk) 22:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 13:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
No evidence that Karen Horton [1] [2] holds copyright for this photo of 1964-65. Materialscientist (talk) 05:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 22:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 22:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 22:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jinyufz#Images_you_uploaded: not own work, no otrs forthcoming. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No evidence that the images are "ineligible for copyright" in the country of origin (Brazil)--Even in the US they are original enough. Also, there is no evidence that its author released it under a CC-License. The uploader commented: "The images created in SVG are free because of the request for exclusion? [sic]" Whatever that means, the images are a blatant copyright violation. Tbhotch™ 04:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Original enough in the country of origin (France). No evidence of a CC-License release Tbhotch™ 04:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Original enough in the country of origin (Brazil). No evidence of a free release Tbhotch™ 04:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:06, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Original enough in the country of origin (France). No evidence of a free release Tbhotch™ 04:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- File:Nahapetyan embrios.jpg
- File:Nahapetyan Sevan.jpg
- File:Nahapetyan Автопортрет, 1991 г..jpg
- File:Геноцид 1915 г. Автор Нагапетян К.Г..JPG
- File:Распад озоновой дыры.1990г.JPG
Copyvio. en:Koryun Nahapetyan died in 1999. Takabeg (talk) 06:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:39, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
COM:DW 217.186.17.214 06:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:55, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:10, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
File:Papel de la Mujer en la escuela de filosofía de la Universidad Autónoma de Santo Domingo.pdf
[edit]Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:10, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:32, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused image upload. "Very cool" description in Spanish makes it ideal for personal collection but no academic value. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 07:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Summary "descripcion de un amor" (description of a love) means it is no of academic value. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 07:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Most probably copyrighted, like other photos of same user. Smooth_O (talk) 08:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:44, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Indi.ca is listed at User:FlickreviewR/bad-authors which means that this user probably does not own copyright of all the images he has uploaded to flickr. His flickr id is 85113745@N00. Sreejith K (talk) 09:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Indi.ca is listed at User:FlickreviewR/bad-authors which means that this user probably does not own copyright of all the images he has uploaded to flickr. His flickr id is 85113745@N00. Sreejith K (talk) 09:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Indi.ca is listed at User:FlickreviewR/bad-authors which means that this user probably does not own copyright of all the images he has uploaded to flickr. His flickr id is 85113745@N00. Sreejith K (talk) 09:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by A5b as Speedy (Screenshot of web site with copyrigthed content - www.newsland.ru, © 2012 Newsland). Converted to DR as the screenshot doesn't seem to contain copyrightable content. Túrelio (talk) 10:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- per Commons:Screenshots : "Screenshots of web browsers displaying web sites, ... is not under a free license are not permissible." and "If the page at the screenshot contains images or icons, you have to list them and their authors and licenses,". The source site (newsland.ru) lists everything on this site as non-free (© 2012 Newsland). On this screenshot user icon is used; the source of it is not clear, and it seems to be not CC. `A5b (talk)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:45, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Work of living artist and - per the description on Flickr and the Flickr user's profile - obviously located in the US, which does not have a FOP exemption for non-buildings; thereby a copyvio. - Túrelio (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No permission, third page of the file states: 'Reservados todos los derechos' Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:46, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Herbythyme as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Based on other uploads by this user the fact that EXIF states "Copyright 2006" suggests it may be copyrighted Sreejith K (talk) 12:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
There's other pic like this uploaded. Willy Weazley 16:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No FOP for indoors North Korean leaders in Japan. See COM:FOP#Japan. Despite the photo showing North Korean leaders Kim Il-sŏng and Kim Chŏng-il, the photo was actually taken in Tōkyō. Stefan4 (talk) 16:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
copyvio of this site Bzh-99 (talk) 16:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio - I can't find where this version was taken from but a smaller version of this image appears in a 2005 BBC article credited to AFP. January (talk) 17:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This has been created with intent of malice. It is being used to harass me. 118.103.235.94 17:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 23:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Likely copyvio: this is clearly a picture or scan of another work. P199 (talk) 19:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo that does not (IMO) qualify for PD-textlogo. Commons does not allow fair use images. – JBarta (talk) 22:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Not an own work, taken from http://www.lib.e-mordovia.ru/Library/?Char=%C4&id=4 User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:42, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
out of scope, not used, article del. on DE Nolispanmo 12:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep user image of Urs.Waefler. --Foroa (talk) 16:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- the user deleted (cleared) his user page in march 2010 and want to change his user name. There is no need to keep it. greetings --Nolispanmo 07:15, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete it. --194.29.25.154 07:21, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Please delete this file. --Urs.W (talk) 09:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
- Delete it. --194.29.25.154 07:21, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope, not used (user photo of an ex-user) Reinhard Kraasch (talk) 18:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
The portrait is made by Johan Nordhagen (1856-1956) (signed in the lower left corner) and it will not be in the public domain until 2027. 46.15.116.18 07:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- No objections to deletion. My wrong, and my unawareness had no malintention. file:Vinje.jpg can replace it where needed. --Morten Haugen (talk) 08:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Comment I ordered CommonsDelinker to replace the image with file:Vinje.jpg as Orland said [3]. I will check again in a couple of days and delete the old file. If anyone wants to do it earlier, please first check if it's replaced everywhere because it was heavily used. - Badseed talk 01:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Badseed talk 22:47, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
The fields "source", "author" and "permission" look very strange. In addition, the frame suggests that this has been copied from somewhere. Copyvio likely, I'd say. Stefan4 (talk) 14:04, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Certainly does look like a scan or a photo of a photo. Secondly, I think it's out of project scope -- not in use and looks like a personal type of picture anyways. Per Google Translate, the image description also seems to be nonsense. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo. Badseed talk 00:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Slightly larger version here, which points to it being a crop of this Flickr photo by Alejandra Barrales, which is all rights reserved. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Badseed talk 00:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. Also appears on other web-sites. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Don't know about small, but there is a larger version here. At the very least needs OTRS permission, so Delete. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:18, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Badseed talk 00:25, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
According to this page the painting appears to be copyright property of Nordnorsk Kunstmuseum. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Painting is apparently by en:Peter Nicolai Arbo, died 1892, so the painting is no longer in copyright. They may be trying to claim copyright on their photo, but on Commons that falls under Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag. Keep. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep, I think Carl has got it right. If the painter died over a century ago, we are free to use it.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 07:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Kept as {{PD-Art}} per Carl Lindberg. Note: Actually it already existed as File:Stamford by Peter Nicolai Arbo.jpg and it should someday be handled as a dupe Badseed talk 23:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Edoderoo (talk) 21:10, 22 May 2012 (UTC) image most likely not own work, available in youtube, and several other websites. Edoderoo (talk) 21:10, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: And File:EMiR2.jpg as well, copyright violations. Badseed talk 23:04, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Since File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg has been updated accordingly, I belive this can go now. Fry1989 eh? 21:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Eh... may keep even if just for better attribution. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's hardly neccessary, the graph the flag is based on can be sourced as attribution. We don't need two of these. Fry1989 eh? 19:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Necessary? It is usual practice for Commons. The practice of uploading multiple variations based on different sources as has occurred in File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg doesn't inspire much faith that the process is convergent, and leaves a rather muddled history. It would be much more preferable to have each major revision, or alternative sourced version as a seperate file. --Tony Wills (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- This file was uploaded for one reason and only one reason: File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg is a protected file that only Admins can edit. The uploader therefore had to upload it seperately because he's been working with Zscout370 on making our flag files more accurate. Now that File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg has been updated to match, there is absolutely no need for this file to stay. Attribution is a joke, that information can easily be merged by an Admin. Fry1989 eh? 19:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- Totally correct. Achim1999 (talk) 10:58, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- The uploader appears to agree, and also National Flag of Malaysia was deleted without a DR for the same reason, as it was uploaded for the same purpose. Fry1989 eh? 05:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- Sounds like File:National_Flag_of_Malaysia.svg was deleted without proper process, doesn't sound as though it met any speedy deletion criteria. --Tony Wills (talk) 07:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- Don't be preposterous! It met the grounds for speedy deletion quite easily. As said before, it was uploaded for one sole reason, File:Flag of Malaysia.svg is a protected file that only admins may edit. Because of that, the uploader was forced to upload his corrections according to the construction sheet separetly and provide them to an admin willing to do the upload on the protected file. Once that was done, there was no more need for File:National_Flag_of_Malaysia.svg to be here. Whether you like it or not, not everything needs a DR and massive explanations before it gets deleted, it just needs common sense! This is the exact same circumstance. Fry1989 eh? 07:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- Commons sense perhaps :-). Had a look at it, and the process seems to be fine. Basically it was a speedy deletion as an "exact duplicate". It relies on being able to overwrite the main file with the updated vesion without contoversy. If that is fine, then the speedy deletion of the duplicate can happen once any merging of information from the duplicate into the kept file, takes place. In this case that really is only the upload information of the revision (eg author and date). The cleanest way to record that information is probably in the upload summary when the over-writing takes place. --Tony Wills (talk) 09:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- Don't be preposterous! It met the grounds for speedy deletion quite easily. As said before, it was uploaded for one sole reason, File:Flag of Malaysia.svg is a protected file that only admins may edit. Because of that, the uploader was forced to upload his corrections according to the construction sheet separetly and provide them to an admin willing to do the upload on the protected file. Once that was done, there was no more need for File:National_Flag_of_Malaysia.svg to be here. Whether you like it or not, not everything needs a DR and massive explanations before it gets deleted, it just needs common sense! This is the exact same circumstance. Fry1989 eh? 07:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- Sounds like File:National_Flag_of_Malaysia.svg was deleted without proper process, doesn't sound as though it met any speedy deletion criteria. --Tony Wills (talk) 07:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- If the uploader is asking for deletion and doesn't want attribution, and the file is not in use and is newly uploaded so not liable to be in use elsewhere, then I have no objection. --Tony Wills (talk) 07:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- The uploader appears to agree, and also National Flag of Malaysia was deleted without a DR for the same reason, as it was uploaded for the same purpose. Fry1989 eh? 05:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- Totally correct. Achim1999 (talk) 10:58, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- This file was uploaded for one reason and only one reason: File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg is a protected file that only Admins can edit. The uploader therefore had to upload it seperately because he's been working with Zscout370 on making our flag files more accurate. Now that File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg has been updated to match, there is absolutely no need for this file to stay. Attribution is a joke, that information can easily be merged by an Admin. Fry1989 eh? 19:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- Necessary? It is usual practice for Commons. The practice of uploading multiple variations based on different sources as has occurred in File:Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg doesn't inspire much faith that the process is convergent, and leaves a rather muddled history. It would be much more preferable to have each major revision, or alternative sourced version as a seperate file. --Tony Wills (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- That's hardly neccessary, the graph the flag is based on can be sourced as attribution. We don't need two of these. Fry1989 eh? 19:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Apparent consensus, uploader agrees, changes have been implemented in the other file and this one is unused duplicate of the other flag. Badseed talk 00:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Present postcard / carte postale actuelle Trizek here or on fr:wp 23:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete probably a copyvio (false attribution and license) - Bzh-99 (talk) 21:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Badseed talk 00:08, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
As the credit line says, this image was produced by not just NASA and JPL, but also by the University of Arizona (apparently by the MIPS group in the university's Astronomy Dept). So they would hold copyright (perhaps jointly with JPL), but there doesn't seem to be any indication that they have released the image under a free license. Have I missed something? It would be a shame to delete it. Avenue (talk) 13:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep I think. The image is from a NASA website. It is from the Spitzer telescope, not that MIPS equipment, it sounds like. Caltech's Spitzer images rights are here; it looks like that project (like many other NASA projects) likely mandates PD status. Finally, the credit line is not necessarily a copyright statement; it is just a credit. Also see m:Legal and Community Advocacy/NASA images. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. I hadn't thought about the differences between a credit line and a copyright statement, which is an important point. That meta page is helpful, as are some of the links given there, though perhaps not conclusive. I believe that the image was made using the MIPS equipment ("This image is made up of data from Spitzer's infrared array camera and multiband imaging photometer",[4] and MIPS means "Multiband Imaging Photometer for SIRTF"[5]), but that still does not tell us whether the Arizona people contributed creatively to making this particular image. That is the critical question here, I think. --Avenue (talk) 19:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ah OK, didn't read enough. Thought the MIPS group had their own satellite; rather they just made that piece of equipment on the Spitzer telescope, which was partially used in the making of this photo. Thus, the credit. NASA does like to credit anyone involved in whatever way. It does not imply copyright ownership at all, as that would be the person directing the tool... sort of like Canon does not get copyright control over anyone using a Canon camera ;-) If there is an explicit copyright claim by someone at U of Arizona, that may change things, but I think this is OK given what we can see. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Yes, given that NASA released the image and they are credited first, it seems likely they had the most creative role (which here is probably the allocation of colours to different bands of the infrared spectrum). Unless some other information comes to light, I agree we should keep the image. --Avenue (talk) 13:33, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. MBisanz talk 00:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Messieurs les senseurs, tirez les premiers!
Nazi symbol. 84.61.181.19 18:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's actually a neo-Nazi symbol at best, and in any case, that's not a valid reason for deletion -- we have plenty of Nazi symbols here on commons, starting with File:Flag of German Reich (1935–1945).svg... AnonMoos (talk) 18:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Keep. Nazis didn't do LSD and then make new versions of their symbol.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:18, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Category:Greek key. It seems to been around for a few centuries.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:23, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep In wide use. "Nazi symbol" is also not a reason for deletion. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:55, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not an expert on symbols, let alone neo-nazi symbols, but are we sure that the one on the flag within the public domain? Sven Manguard Wha? 03:50, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- It almost certainly would not be copyrightable under the laws of the United States (have no idea about the laws of Greece)... AnonMoos (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- The original was created from scratch under a free licence. See Category:Greek key. It has been around for many centuries. Country of origin is Greece on most of those, but the free work from scratch can be considered as 'parallel' creation to any that may have copyrights in Greece. I doubt that anyone can copyright a black and red circle in Greece and if they can commons should just ignore that for any circles we make from scratch and upload here.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, didn't know what a greek key was. In that case, Keep. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, didn't know what a greek key was. In that case,
- The original was created from scratch under a free licence. See Category:Greek key. It has been around for many centuries. Country of origin is Greece on most of those, but the free work from scratch can be considered as 'parallel' creation to any that may have copyrights in Greece. I doubt that anyone can copyright a black and red circle in Greece and if they can commons should just ignore that for any circles we make from scratch and upload here.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- It almost certainly would not be copyrightable under the laws of the United States (have no idea about the laws of Greece)... AnonMoos (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Since when is even an actual nazi symbol cause for deletion? I wasn't aware of any policy against hosting such symbols, and I don't see deletion requests for the multitude of files in flags of Nazi Germany. Mnmazur (talk)
- Keep Keep : It is a legal symbol for the Party in Greece. So why would we delete it on a encyclopedia website like this?
- Keep Keep : "Nazi symbol"? So is Commons supposed to pretend that the Nazi's didnt exist? Have their symbols been declared illegal? This isn't even a Nazi symbol (though yes, it is obviously derived from the the Swastika, a symbol that has existed for several millennia before the birth of Adolf Hitler), it is the symbol of an established Greek political party. Foolish reasoning for deletion. Ferdiaob (talk) 18:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep "Reason for deletion: Nazi symbol". WHAT?????????? LOL! Yes of course it is a nazi symbol: It is the official flag of the neo-nazi greek party Gold Dawn and it illustrates its page. Black Hole GR (talk) 19:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. MBisanz talk 00:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
"All Images and posters are free to share" stated on file page (without link to source). Is also editing allowed? Commercial use? Saibo (Δ∇) 20:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete I can't even find the "free to share" statement on the website, and that is not explicit enough permission anyways. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. MBisanz talk 00:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't this the upload is "Per á Hædd" (I believe this is the photographers name). From the description this seems to have been a photo shoot for the airline. Doubtful release of this image into the PD by non-copyright holder russavia (talk) 00:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
NeutralThe file was originally uploaded by EnWiki user Bylgjan, who pretty much haven't contributed to other articles. Further the image seems to be stripped of all EXIF-data, Per á Hædd is a known Faroese photographer and no other source have been given. All that talks for deletion. However the file is substantially larger than any other version I have been able to find of it, using Google Images and doesn't look upscaled. It could simply be, that it is an employee of Atlantic Airways who might have the right to do so. I have mailed him/her using w:en:Special:EmailUser/Bylgjan and think we should give the user a couple of days to answer. If nothing is heard by then, I will go for a delete. --heb [T C E] 02:56, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: No permission from photographer . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
if what the description says is correct, this photograph was never published before 2009, thus the 70-year pma date would start from 2009, not the date of creation. It also uses the horribly wrong {{PD-Austria}} template which is on DR for a reason. Liliana-60 (talk) 05:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
addendum: also note that the EU, where Austria is located, grants a w:Publication right of 25 years since publication, so even if the author is long dead, we can't use the image for the next few years. -- Liliana-60 (talk) 05:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Keep Since this was used on a passport, it is considered published. "Publication" means the bringing of a work in contact with people other than the immediate environment of the artist, not necessarily published in a book etc. Perhaps this also qualifies for {{PD-Ottoman}}- Badseed talk 00:34, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Use on a passport -- showing an image to a limited number of people -- is not publication in the USA and not generally elsewhere. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:52, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Edoderoo (talk) 15:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC) this image is not free Edoderoo (talk) 15:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: No permission . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
No date or author to corroborate PD-OLD. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:22, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- photo taken before 1922. Chesdovi (talk) 13:52, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- We need to know when the photographer died since PD is 70 years pma. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- would {{PD-Egypt}} suffice? Chesdovi (talk) 15:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- It quite possibly is a Type B image, in which case we still need to know when the author died. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:13, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- We can add {{PD-1923}} and hope for the best. Chesdovi (talk) 09:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- It quite possibly is a Type B image, in which case we still need to know when the author died. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:13, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- would {{PD-Egypt}} suffice? Chesdovi (talk) 15:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- We need to know when the photographer died since PD is 70 years pma. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: unknown date of death of author . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Image is corrupted. Same result if I go to the original source. Gyrofrog (talk) 17:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- It is the best USGS image available. I'm aware of it's bad scan lines and mis-registration between images However, it is for illustrative purposes in the article, not photogrammetry Bwmoll3 (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- if you go here http://www.topoquest.com/map.php?lat=31.63727&lon=-97.07917&datum=nad83&zoom=8&map=sat1m&coord=d&mode=zoomout&size=l you can see the USGS scanner was having a bad day when it was imaged. Unfortunately they don't refly them but every few years. Bwmoll3 (talk) 18:04, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- I understand that it's the best available (from USGS, anyway). I just don't think it's suitable, even for illustrative purposes. My $0.02. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use at TSTC Waco Airport, therefore cannot be deleted except for copyvio. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
This logo is squished horizontally. We already have File:Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg and File:Wikipedia svg logo.svg and lots of others. The fact that apparently hundreds of people are using this defective logo is unfortunate. We should redirect them to File:Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg instead. Kaldari (talk) 00:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Strong keep Although Commons does not accept copyrighted images except those with {{Copyright by wikimedia}}, keep because if you delete it, all pages with the image are rerendered. --Captaincollect1970 (talk) 20:14, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- We can just redirect the page to the non-squished logo, so deleting it wouldn't cause any problems. Kaldari (talk) 20:13, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The reasons for a redirect are reasonable FASTILY (TALK) 02:37, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Jost (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2012 (UTC) Die Datei hat aus Versehen die falsche Bezeichnung - Schreibfehler - Wrong description - Author request; möchte dieselbe Datei nach Löschung mit richtigem Namen erneut hochladen. Jost (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 02:21, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Coat of arms of the Democratic Republic of Georgia.jpg , there's also an SVG Fry1989 eh? 21:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Not an exact duplicate of the JPG version and not generated from the SVG version (a different interpretation). But it is certainly very similar to the JPG, it is the same dimensions, but seems to have a smaller colour palette as we see colour banding and shading differences. There are also a couple of strange, but minor changes - a couple of notches out of the pattern at different places and a distortion of one of the eyes in one of the suns. (I have added notations to the image, they can be reverted if the image is kept). I would assume that one was derived from the other, this may perhaps be derived from a previous revision of the JPG that wasn't copied across to Commons when that file was moved here. So I'm not sure where this version fits in, no great harm in keeping it, no great harm in deleting it ;-). Perhaps the uploader will tell us where it fits in. --Tony Wills (talk) 22:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
- Colour banding appears to be the result of reducing palette from 256 shades to 16, other artifacts are unexplained. So this is a 'scaled down' version in respect of the colour dimension :-), maybe someone created it in the process of generating an SVG, but this version isn't mentioned in the graphics workshop. I have no objection to it being deleted. --Tony Wills (talk) 23:34, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 02:21, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Nazi symbol. 84.61.181.19 18:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- This should have been consolidated with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Meandros flag.svg (same factors apply to both). AnonMoos (talk) 00:01, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. should we add the link that DR and have admin close this DR as a duplicate?--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Proper flag in prescribed proportions at File:Flag of Shetland.svg Fry1989 eh? 21:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Flag of Shetland.svg has wrong proportions, color, and style of Nordic cross. The blue is not PMS 300, the fields at the hoist are not square, the arms of the cross are too thick and the flag is not 3:5. User:Taikoboy
- If there is a problem with File:Flag of Shetland.svg, it can be corrected accordingly, but you shouldn't upload another separate SVG and start replacing it everywhere. Fry1989 eh? 00:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- I see absolutely no problem with having this as a seperate file. It is normal pratice to upload major revisions of files on Commons as seperate versions (also avoids needless reversion wars). We don't have a different policy for SVG images. The argument that the other should be modified accordingly (even it were true) is not a reason to delete this one. --Tony Wills (talk) 13:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- It absolutely is a reasoning and it has been accepted as one in many many DRs. Fry1989 eh? 19:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- I would be happy to review those DRs :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
- Good for you, but I don't believe you're an admin so all you can do is make unDR requests, and I'm certainly not showing you all those past DRs because your only intent here seems to be "keep anything and everything no matter what the circumstances are, duplication or any other valid reason be damned". If you want to dig through history and be mindblown to find out how many files have been deleted for reasonings you constantly say "we don't accept", you can do that on your own time. Fry1989 eh? 03:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your suggestion, I have been wading through your deletion requests to try and find these fabled successful deletion requests on the same basis. Most have been quite sensible, like lots of scaled down flags made from our SVGs, I have commented on a handful of others where I see no reason for deletion. Maybe your successful ones on this basis are further back, I'll keep looking. --Tony Wills (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- You do know there's such a thing as wiki-stalking, and you've just admitted to it? Perhaps you should stop following me around. Fry1989 eh? 23:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, not a good look :-). I haven't actually been checking your every edit, and looking for mistakes to complain about :-). I am interested in your apparent assertion that files are deleted all the time on the basis that there should only be one version of SVGs and changes should all be applied to the one file rather than having different uploads. I have reviewed lots of deletion requests, and specifically looked at ones you have edited on the assumption that they may be ones where the criteria that you support are used for deletion. You could always point me in the direction of the evidence if there is any, I haven't come across it yet. I do in passing express my opinion when I come across deletion requests that are unnecessary.
- Your characterization of my reasons for opposing deletion requests is wrong. I have tried to be very specific about what I oppose. I oppose the idea that there is some difference between SVGs and other images that means we do not want to keep revisions if they are in seperate files and that all revisions should be carried out on one file (overwriting), rather than the long standing Commons practice of keeping all revisions of media, and only overwriting with minor (uncontroversial) changes - Thus giving our users and other projects complete choice in which version suits their needs. --Tony Wills (talk) 05:29, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
- You do know there's such a thing as wiki-stalking, and you've just admitted to it? Perhaps you should stop following me around. Fry1989 eh? 23:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your suggestion, I have been wading through your deletion requests to try and find these fabled successful deletion requests on the same basis. Most have been quite sensible, like lots of scaled down flags made from our SVGs, I have commented on a handful of others where I see no reason for deletion. Maybe your successful ones on this basis are further back, I'll keep looking. --Tony Wills (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- Good for you, but I don't believe you're an admin so all you can do is make unDR requests, and I'm certainly not showing you all those past DRs because your only intent here seems to be "keep anything and everything no matter what the circumstances are, duplication or any other valid reason be damned". If you want to dig through history and be mindblown to find out how many files have been deleted for reasonings you constantly say "we don't accept", you can do that on your own time. Fry1989 eh? 03:41, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- I would be happy to review those DRs :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
- It absolutely is a reasoning and it has been accepted as one in many many DRs. Fry1989 eh? 19:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- I see absolutely no problem with having this as a seperate file. It is normal pratice to upload major revisions of files on Commons as seperate versions (also avoids needless reversion wars). We don't have a different policy for SVG images. The argument that the other should be modified accordingly (even it were true) is not a reason to delete this one. --Tony Wills (talk) 13:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 02:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Photographs of aircraft, not {{PD-ineligible}} as tagged.
January (talk) 07:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- The uploader has since changed the licensing to a custom license stating "The copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that appropriate conditions and references, including permissions for derivative work and commercial use (unless those that are specifically mentioned elsewhere on the page), are fulfilled", but there's no evidence of permission for this licence. January (talk) 16:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Unknown copyright status: Source link is deadend, author marked as "Peruvian Armed Forces", uploader never responded... Badseed talk 01:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Rosetta (spacecraft)
[edit]Though taken on a NASA website, these material are from ESA and are neither in the public domain nor publisehd under a free license.
Jean-Fred (talk) 15:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm. Many ESO images are under the CC-BY-3.0 license (see here), which at least applies to File:Comet 67P Churyumov-Gerasimenko.jpg apparently. Secondly... the two listed files are artist impressions. If they are NASA artists, then the copyright is fine, regardless of the project (NASA is collaborating in it). If they were done by ESA artists, then there may be an issue. Is there a source other than the NASA website? Only one image on the NASA Rosetta artist concepts gallery has an explicit ESA credit. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I do see a source here with a credit to "ESA / AOES Medialab". Second one is here, with the same credit. Delete on the two nominated images then. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:54, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I do see a source here with a credit to "ESA / AOES Medialab". Second one is here, with the same credit.
- This is ESA, European Space Agency, and not ESO, European Southern Observatory :-). Though they are using a liberal license for educational purposes, ESA has often clearly stated that they do not use free licenses.
- (Which makes me wonder about their choice for Hubble images − see {{CC-Hubble}} − but, well :).
- Jean-Fred (talk) 19:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- At least one of the photos in the category was ESO specifically. But yes, it looks like the ESA does not always do the same. I did not know about CC-Hubble; I created {{ESA-Hubble}} a while back (which has that same explicit CC-BY-3.0 license) but maybe I should just make that a redirect. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per the proposer: PD-USGov-NASA cannot apply as these pictures weren't made by NASA. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:44, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by MinardsYura (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Metallist-winner-kadyrov-cup-2012.jpg
- File:Berezovchuk-Izmailov-Metallist Sporting-1-1.jpg
- File:Milan-Obradovic-Matias-Fernandes-Metallist Sporting-1-1.jpg
- File:Marco-Devic-Marcus-Suttner-Metallist-Austria-Vien-4-1.jpg
- File:Johnathan-Cristaldo-Metalist-Sochaux-4-0.jpg
- File:Milan-Obradovic-Sven-Bendey-Metallist Bayer-0-4.jpg
- File:Sergey-Psenicnich-Bernat-Chaba-Metalist-Debrecen-2-1.jpg
- File:Denis-Olynyk-goal-Sampdoria-Metallist.jpg
- File:Andrey-Voronin-Jaja-Coelho-Metalist-Herta-BSC-0-0.jpg
- File:Leon Osman & Severin Gancarcic-Everton-Metallist-1-1.jpeg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete all. The uploader's authorship claims obviously cannot be trusted. File:Sergey-Psenicnich-Bernat-Chaba-Metalist-Debrecen-2-1.jpg isn't missing EXIF. The EXIF clearly states that it's a non-free AFP photo by Sergei Supinsky. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio uploader Martin H. (talk) 01:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Juliobueno11 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF/different cameras.
- File:Condecofic01.jpg
- File:Lenin Moreno con Joan Manuel Serrat.jpg
- File:Vamos-por-el-nobel-lenin-moreno.jpg
- File:Declaración copia.jpg
- File:Lenin Moreno con Patch Adams.jpg
- File:Lenin Voltaire Moreno Garcés.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. MBisanz talk 00:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Weder Urheber noch Veröffentlichungsdatum ist angegeben. Deshalb ist nicht klar, ob das Bild wirklich gemeinfrei ist. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 06:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Laut Zeno.org ist das Bild gemeinfrei und von um 1900 http://www.zeno.org/Bildpostkarten/M/Adel+und+Monarchie/Bayern/Ludwig+II.+als+Georgiritter
- Das zugrundeliegende Foto ist von 1866. --Fg68at de:Disk 10:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Die Grafik ist quasi eine 1:1-Kopie, wahrscheinlich angefertigt wegen der Farbe.
- Ich hab jetzt noch bei der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek nachgefragt. --Fg68at de:Disk 10:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Zugrundeliegendes Originalfoto ist von Joseph Albert (1825-1886). [6], [7]. Die Farbpostkarte ist nicht im Bestand der Bibliothek. --Fg68at de:Disk 13:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
![[7]](http://fachkataloge.bsb-muenchen.de/img/port-020133.jpg){kind=link}
Danke für deine Bemühungen und Erkundigungen. Ich denke, damit kann man tatsächlich von Gemeinfreiheit ausgehen. Ich habe den Löschantrag zurückgezogen. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 13:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
